AMD Radeon Pro W6600X vs AMD Radeon PRO W7800 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 records an average benchmark score of 164,894, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X records 107,342. That is a difference of roughly 53.6% in favor of the W7800.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The W7800 ships with 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W6600X has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s. The W7800 offers four times the capacity and more than double the bandwidth.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each card?

A: The W7800 sits in the 97th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the W6600X sits in the 94th percentile. Both are high-ranking parts, but the W7800 is measurably closer to the top of the overall distribution.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The W6600X has a boost clock of 2479 MHz, which is slightly higher than the W7800's boost clock of 2525 MHz? No, that is incorrect. The W7800 boosts to 2525 MHz, which is 46 MHz higher than the W6600X's 2479 MHz. The W6600X does have a higher base clock at 2068 MHz versus 1895 MHz.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each card according to the database?

A: The W7800's nearest rival is the NVIDIA RTX A5500, which scores 165,217, only 0.2% higher. The W6600X's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, which scores 106,750, putting it 0.6% behind the W6600X.

Q: Are both cards currently in production?

A: No. The W7800 is listed as Active in production status, while the W6600X is listed as End-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations of AMD's Radeon Pro lineup. The W7800 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip, codenamed Plum Bonito, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series). The W6600X uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip and belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Navi II Series). This generational gap is visible throughout the specifications.

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The W7800 is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the W6600X uses a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. The transistor counts reflect this: the W7800 packs 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, whereas the W6600X has 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die. Transistor density is 109.1M per mm² for the W7800 versus 46.7M per mm² for the W6600X.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the newer card. The W7800 has 4480 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, 128 ROPs, and 70 ray tracing cores. The W6600X has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. In every category, the W7800 roughly doubles or more than doubles the W6600X's hardware count.

Clock behavior is interesting. The W6600X has a higher base clock at 2068 MHz versus 1895 MHz on the W7800. At boost, the W7800 takes the lead at 2525 MHz versus 2479 MHz. Memory clocks also favor the W7800: 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate versus 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective on the W6600X.

The W7800 supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the W6600X uses Apple MPX as its bus interface. Display outputs differ completely: the W7800 offers 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1, while the W6600X has no outputs at all. The W6600X is clearly designed as a compute-oriented Mac module rather than a traditional display card.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has tensor cores listed. The W7800 is a dual-slot card with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The W6600X is also dual-slot but has no power connectors listed and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The W7800 has a TDP of 260 W, while the W6600X has a TDP of 120 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark results are not present in the database for these two cards. However, comparing their recorded benchmark scores and nearest rivals provides a clear picture of relative performance.

The W7800 achieves 154,366 in Geekbench OpenCL and 175,422 in Geekbench Vulkan. The W6600X has no OpenCL or Vulkan scores recorded; instead, it has a Geekbench Metal score of 107,342. The W7800's average benchmark score of 164,894 versus the W6600X's 107,342 shows a substantial gap of 57,552 points, which is roughly 53.6% higher for the W7800.

Looking at the W7800's nearest rivals, the data shows it is tightly clustered with high-end NVIDIA workstation parts. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 scores 165,217, which is 0.2% higher than the W7800. The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation scores 166,094, 0.7% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X scores 168,574, 2.2% higher. Only the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB scores lower among these rivals, at 162,504, which is 1.5% below the W7800. This places the W7800 in a competitive band where no rival exceeds it by more than 2.2%.

The W6600X's nearest rivals tell a different story. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo scores 106,750, which is 0.6% lower than the W6600X. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II scores 109,617, which is 2.1% higher. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 scores 110,725, which is 3.1% higher. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 scores 101,872, which is 5.4% lower. The W6600X thus sits in the middle of a group of older or differently positioned workstation cards, with a spread from 5.4% below to 3.1% above its score.

The performance gap between the two AMD cards is larger than the gap between either card and its nearest rivals. The W7800 is 53.6% ahead of the W6600X in average benchmark score. That is a decisive margin, larger than any delta seen in either card's nearest-rival set. The W7800's closest rival, the RTX A5500, is only 0.2% away, while the W6600X's closest rival, the Vega II Duo, is only 0.6% away. In other words, the two cards do not compete with each other; they occupy different performance tiers entirely.

The percentile data reinforces this. The W7800 is in the 97th percentile of all GPUs, while the W6600X is in the 94th percentile. A three-percentile gap in the database distribution corresponds to a large absolute score difference, consistent with the 57,552-point average score gap.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear hierarchy. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the stronger card by a wide margin, with an average benchmark score of 164,894 versus 107,342 for the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X. That is roughly 53.6% higher performance in the database's measurements.

The W7800 belongs in a performance tier with the NVIDIA RTX A5500, RTX 4500 Ada Generation, and AMD Radeon Pro W6900X. Its nearest rival, the RTX A5500, is only 0.2% above it, meaning the W7800 is effectively at parity with that card. It is also 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB and 2.2% behind the Radeon Pro W6900X. Anyone choosing among these cards should expect near-identical average benchmark results.

The W6600X sits in a lower tier. Its nearest rivals include the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, Radeon Pro Vega II, Radeon PRO W7900, and Quadro RTX 6000. The W6600X beats the Vega II Duo by 0.6% and the Quadro RTX 6000 by 5.4%, but trails the Vega II by 2.1% and the W7900 by 3.1%. It is competitive within its group, but that group is far below the W7800's group in absolute terms.

Architecture and specifications support the benchmark gap. The W7800 has more than double the shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores of the W6600X. It has four times the memory capacity (32 GB versus 8 GB), more than double the memory bandwidth (576.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s), and a newer 5 nm process versus 7 nm. Its FP32 throughput is 45.25 TFLOPS versus 10.15 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput is 90.50 TFLOPS versus 20.31 TFLOPS.

The W7800 is the appropriate choice for workloads that demand high compute throughput, large memory capacity, and broad display connectivity. Its 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs make it a viable workstation display card. The W6600X has no display outputs, so it is not suited for driving monitors. Its Apple MPX bus interface and lack of power connectors suggest it is intended for specific Mac chassis configurations.

The W6600X remains relevant within its niche. It is end-of-life, but its 94th percentile ranking and competitive standing against the Vega II Duo and Quadro RTX 6000 mean it is not an obsolete part. Its 120 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU make it a low-power option relative to the W7800's 260 W TDP and 600 W suggested PSU.

The launch MSRP of the W7800 is 2,499 USD. The launch MSRP of the W6600X is 699 USD. The performance gap is far larger than the price gap would suggest on paper, but the database does not provide cost-performance analysis. The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the W7800 is the higher-performance card by a substantial margin, and the W6600X is a lower-power, lower-performance part aimed at a different use case.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 on the W7800 versus RDNA 2.0 on the W6600X
• Chip: Navi 31 versus Navi 23
• Codename: Plum Bonito on the W7800, not listed on the W6600X
• Generation: Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) versus Radeon Pro Mac (Navi II Series)
• Process node: 5 nm versus 7 nm
• Transistors: 57,700 million versus 11,060 million
• Die size: 529 mm² versus 237 mm²
• Transistor density: 109.1M per mm² versus 46.7M per mm²
• Base clock: 1895 MHz versus 2068 MHz
• Boost clock: 2525 MHz versus 2479 MHz
• Memory clock: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 32 GB versus 8 GB
• Memory bus width: 256 bit versus 128 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 576.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 4480 versus 2048
• TMUs: 280 versus 128
• ROPs: 128 versus 64
• Ray tracing cores: 70 versus 32
• Pixel rate: 323.2 GPixel/s versus 158.7 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 707.0 GTexel/s versus 317.3 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 45.25 TFLOPS versus 10.15 TFLOPS
• FP16 performance: 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 20.31 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 260 W versus 120 W
• Power connectors: 2x 8-pin versus none listed
• Suggested PSU: 600 W versus 300 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus Apple MPX
• Display outputs: 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 versus no outputs
• Dimensions: 280 mm length, 110 mm height, 40 mm width on the W7800; not listed on the W6600X
• Production status: Active versus End-of-life
• Release date: 2023-04-12 versus 2021-08-02
• Launch MSRP: 2,499 USD versus 699 USD
• Benchmark scores: Geekbench OpenCL 154,366 and Geekbench Vulkan 175,422 on the W7800 versus Geekbench Metal 107,342 on the W6600X
• Average benchmark score: 164,894 versus 107,342
• Percentile vs all GPUs: 97th versus 94th

The two cards share identical API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are dual-slot cards. Neither has tensor cores listed. The W7800 has a predecessor listed as Radeon Pro Vega, while the W6600X has no predecessor or successor listed.